You make my point for me. My point has always been that creationism/ID are consistent with ANY observation. Because of that, they are not falsifiable and hence are not scientific theories. If I am wrong, then please give an observation that would be inconsistent with ID/creationism (take your pick). It need not be something that has actually been observed, just something that potentially could be observed. Example, as pertaining to evolution: finding a new species of organism on earth that has different genetic material from all others would falsify common descent, which is a large part of the theory of evolution. Give a similar example for ID or creationism.
>> they are not falsifiable and hence are not scientific theories.<<
When did I say they were?
Your whole post seems to try to make the point that if something can not be falsifiable, then it cannot be true. What we are dealing with is outside the relm of human understanding, and our home-made "rules of science" need not be obeyed by reality.
Our rules are made up so man can wrap his mind around a process, not so that creation will obey some arbitrary rules before it can be "certified" as real.